As I’m sure you know, the Washington
Post Newspaper has always had a reputation for being extremely liberal, so the
fact that their Editor saw fit to print the following article about Obama in
their newspaper makes this a truly amazing event and a news story in and of
itself. Finally, the truth about our radical President’s agenda is
starting to trickle through the ‘protective walls’ built by our liberal media.

Matt Patterson (columnist for the Washington Post, New York
Post, San Francisco Examiner)

Government & Society

Years from now, historians may regard the 2008 election of Barack Obama as an
inscrutable and disturbing phenomenon, the result of a baffling breed of mass
hysteria akin perhaps to the witch craze of the Middle Ages.

How, they will wonder, did a man so devoid of professional accomplishment
beguile so many into thinking he could manage the world's largest economy,
direct the world's most powerful military, execute the world's most
consequential job? Imagine a future historian examining Obama's
pre-presidential life: ushered into and through the Ivy League despite
unremarkable grades and test scores along the way; a cushy non-job as a
"community organizer"; a brief career as a state legislator devoid of
legislative achievement (and in fact nearly devoid of his attention, so often
did he vote "present") ; and finally an unaccomplished single term in
the United States Senate, the entirety of which was devoted to his presidential
ambitions.

He left no academic legacy in academia, authored no signature legislation as a
legislator. And then there is the matter of his troubling associations: the
white-hating, America-loathing preacher who for decades served as Obama's
"spiritual mentor"; a real-life, actual terrorist who served as
Obama's colleague and political sponsor. It is easy to imagine a future
historian looking at it all and asking: how on Earth was such a man elected
president?

Not content to wait for history, the incomparable Norman Podhoretz addressed
the question recently in the Wall Street Journal: To be sure, no white
candidate who had close associations with an outspoken hater of America like
Jeremiah Wright and an unrepentant terrorist like Bill Ayers, would have lasted
a single day. But because Mr. Obama was black, and therefore entitled in the
eyes of liberaldom to have hung out with protesters against various American
injustices, even if they were a bit extreme, he was given a pass. Let that sink
in: Obama was given a pass - held to a lower standard - because of the color of
his skin.

Podhoretz continues: And in any case, what did such ancient history matter when
he was also so articulate and elegant and (as he himself had said)
"non-threatening," all of which gave him a fighting chance to become
the first black president and thereby to lay the curse of racism to rest?
Podhoretz puts his finger, I think, on the animating pulse of the Obama
phenomenon -affirmative action. Not in the legal sense, of course. But
certainly in the motivating sentiment behind all affirmative action laws and
regulations, which are designed primarily to make white people, and especially
white liberals, feel good about themselves.

Unfortunately, minorities often suffer so that whites can pat themselves on the
back. Liberals routinely admit minorities to schools for which they are not
qualified, yet take no responsibility for the inevitable poor performance and
high drop-out rates which follow. Liberals don't care if these minority
students fail; liberals aren't around to witness the emotional devastation and
deflated self esteem resulting from the racist policy that is affirmative
action. Yes, racist. Holding someone to a separate standard merely because of
the color of his skin - that's affirmative action in a nutshell, and if that
isn't racism, then nothing is.

And that is what America did to Obama. True, Obama himself was never troubled
by his lack of achievements, but why would he be? As many have noted, Obama was
told he was good enough for Columbia despite undistinguished grades at
Occidental; he was told he was good enough for the US Senate despite a mediocre
record in Illinois; he was told he was good enough to be president despite no
record at all in the Senate. All his life, every step of the way, Obama was
told he was good enough for the next step, in spite of ample evidence to the
contrary.

What could this breed if not the sort of empty narcissism on display every time
Obama speaks? In 2008, many who agreed that he lacked executive qualifications
nonetheless raved about Obama's oratory skills, intellect, and cool character.
Those people - conservatives included - ought now to be deeply embarrassed.

The man thinks and speaks in the hoariest of cliches, and that's when he has
his teleprompter in front of him; when the prompter is absent he can barely
think or speak at all.

Not one original idea has ever issued from his mouth – it's all
warmed-over Marxism of the kind that has failed over and over again for 100
years.

And what about his character? Obama is constantly blaming anything and
everything else for his troubles. Bush did it; it was bad luck; I inherited
this mess. It is embarrassing to see a president so willing to advertise his
own powerlessness, so comfortable with his own incompetence.

But really, what were we to expect? The man has never been responsible for
anything, so how do we expect him to act responsibly?

In short: our president is a small and small-minded man, with neither the
temperament nor the intellect to handle his job.

When you understand that, and only when you understand that, will the
current erosion of liberty and prosperity make sense. It could not have
gone otherwise with such a man in the Oval Office.Here's Matt's website. http://mattpattersononline.co...

Part of it is a rehash of a Post article by Norman Podhoretz. But... This is what my research has turned up'Matt Patterson is editor of Labor Watch and Green Watch at CRC, and the 2011-2012 Warren T. Brookes Journalism Fellow at the Competitive Enterprise Institute. Matt's columns and commentary have appeared in some of the nation's top newspapers and political sites, including the Washington Post, New York Post, Washington Examiner, American Thinker, and FOXNews.com. From 2009 to 2010, he was a Washington Fellow at the National Review Institute. Previously he served as research assistant to Charles Krauthammer and political coordinator for the Rudy Giuliani presidential campaign.

Top Opinion

Well, hey, Washington Post Editorial Staff. You endorsed that man. You and your buddies in the media put him in there. Are you not indulging in the same thing for which you now criticize your fellow liberals? You saw to it that such an unqualified man got into office, and take no responsibility for the revelations that now follow.

FREE SPEECH JUST OUTLAWED BY PRESIDENT OBAMA ! FREE SPEECH IS NOW A FEDERAL CRIME ! ASSIGNATION OF US CITIZENS IS NOW LAWFUL WITHOUT DUE PROCESS BY OBAMA. INDEFINITE DETENTION WITHOUT DUE PROCESS NOW THE LEGAL LAW BY OBAMA.

YUPPER THIS MAN IS FOR FREEDOM OF THE PEOPLE ! CAN WE ALL SAY HILE HITLER !! THIS PRESIDENT IS A TRAITOR TO AMERICA !

the guy is a die hard republican a paid consultant of fox news and hates liberals
Matt Patterson is a columnist and commentator whose work has appeared in some of the nation's top newspapers and political sites, including the Washington Post, New York Post, Washington Examiner, American Thinker, and FOXNews.com. His work has been cited on air by Sean Hannity, quoted in Forbes, POLITICO and The Week magazine, and featured on the Drudge Report, Real Clear Politics, and RushLimbaugh.com, among many others

FREE SPEECH JUST OUTLAWED BY PRESIDENT OBAMA ! FREE SPEECH IS NOW A FEDERAL CRIME ! ASSIGNATION OF US CITIZENS IS NOW LAWFUL WITHOUT DUE PROCESS BY OBAMA. INDEFINITE DETENTION WITHOUT DUE PROCESS NOW THE LEGAL LAW BY OBAMA.

YUPPER THIS MAN IS FOR FREEDOM OF THE PEOPLE ! CAN WE ALL SAY HILE HITLER !! THIS PRESIDENT IS A TRAITOR TO AMERICA !

the guy is a die hard republican a paid consultant of fox news and hates liberals
Matt Patterson is a columnist and commentator whose work has appeared in some of the nation's top newspapers and political sites, including the Washington Post, New York Post, Washington Examiner, American Thinker, and FOXNews.com. His work has been cited on air by Sean Hannity, quoted in Forbes, POLITICO and The Week magazine, and featured on the Drudge Report, Real Clear Politics, and RushLimbaugh.com, among many others

FREE SPEECH JUST OUTLAWED BY PRESIDENT OBAMA ! FREE SPEECH IS NOW A FEDERAL CRIME ! ASSIGNATION OF US CITIZENS IS NOW LAWFUL WITHOUT DUE PROCESS BY OBAMA. INDEFINITE DETENTION WITHOUT DUE PROCESS NOW THE LEGAL LAW BY OBAMA.

YUPPER THIS MAN IS FOR FREEDOM OF THE PEOPLE ! CAN WE ALL SAY HILE HITLER !! THIS PRESIDENT IS A TRAITOR TO AMERICA !

The misinformation out there is truly disturbing....Snopes says one thing and then you go to Factcheck.org and they say something else. I find that more and more I go to news sites in other countries to get the unbiased facts from the USA. Sad.

the guy is a die hard republican a paid consultant of fox news and hates liberals
Matt Patterson is a columnist and commentator whose work has appeared in some of the nation's top newspapers and political sites, including the Washington Post, New York Post, Washington Examiner, American Thinker, and FOXNews.com. His work has been cited on air by Sean Hannity, quoted in Forbes, POLITICO and The Week magazine, and featured on the Drudge Report, Real Clear Politics, and RushLimbaugh.com, among many others

President Obama’s ambitious plan for stepped up government regulation of the oceans includes an unreported effort to cede U.S. oceans to United Nations-based international law, WND has learned.

The plan was previously a pet project of Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta, whose ocean-zoning scheme was partnered with a globalist group that also aimed to hand over U.S. oceans to U.N. governance.

Obama’s plan is still in draft form. It calls for an executive order to be issued for a National Ocean Policy that will determine how the ecosystem is managed while giving the federal government more regulatory authority over any businesses that utilize the ocean.

The executive order is to be based on the recommendations of Obama’s Interagency Ocean Policy Taskforce, created in 2010 also by executive order.

The agency is tasked with recommending specific actions for a presidential plan to achieve the vision of “an America whose stewardship ensures that the ocean, our coasts, and the Great Lakes are healthy and resilient, safe and productive, and understood and treasured so as to promote the well-being, prosperity, and security of present and future generations.”

The Taskforce’s final recommendations, based in part on the supposed effects of “glo...

GUESS WHAT OBAMA IS TRYING TO DO NOW?

President Obama’s ambitious plan for stepped up government regulation of the oceans includes an unreported effort to cede U.S. oceans to United Nations-based international law, WND has learned.

The plan was previously a pet project of Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta, whose ocean-zoning scheme was partnered with a globalist group that also aimed to hand over U.S. oceans to U.N. governance.

Obama’s plan is still in draft form. It calls for an executive order to be issued for a National Ocean Policy that will determine how the ecosystem is managed while giving the federal government more regulatory authority over any businesses that utilize the ocean.

The executive order is to be based on the recommendations of Obama’s Interagency Ocean Policy Taskforce, created in 2010 also by executive order.

The agency is tasked with recommending specific actions for a presidential plan to achieve the vision of “an America whose stewardship ensures that the ocean, our coasts, and the Great Lakes are healthy and resilient, safe and productive, and understood and treasured so as to promote the well-being, prosperity, and security of present and future generations.”

The Taskforce’s final recommendations, based in part on the supposed effects of “global warming, were released in a 78-page paper reviewed by WND.

The entire third section of the report recommends that the U.S. join the U.N.’s Law of the Sea Convention.

The convention defines the rights and responsibilities of nations in their use of the world’s oceans, establishing guidelines for businesses, the environment and the management of marine natural resources.

States the report:

The Task Force strongly and unanimously supports United States accession to the Convention on the Law of the Sea and ratification of its 1994 Implementing Agreement. The Law of the Sea Convention is the bedrock legal instrument governing activities on, over and under the world’s oceans.

United States accession to the Convention will further our national security, environmental, economic, and diplomatic interests.

The report lists key reasons for compliance with the law, including:

The Convention has garnered the unequivocal support of our national security leadership under both Republican and Democratic administrations, because, among other things, it codifies essential navigational rights and freedoms upon which our Armed Forces rely.
The Convention sets forth the rights and responsibilities of nations to prevent, reduce and control pollution of the marine environment and to protect and preserve resources off their shores.
By becoming a party to the Convention, U.S. legal rights to our extended continental shelf can be put on the strongest legal foundation.
As a party to the Law of the Sea Convention, the United States would have the ability to participate formally and more effectively in the interpretation and development of the Convention.
Joining the Law of the Sea Convention would reaffirm and enhance United States leadership in global ocean affairs.
While the White House claims its ocean plans are not meant to zone the seas, a major conclusion of the Taskforce was to “establish a framework for effective coastal and marine spatial planning (CMSP) that establishes a comprehensive, integrated, ecosystem-based approach to address conservation, economic activity, user conflict, and sustainable use of ocean, coastal, and Great Lakes resources.”

Panetta’s ocean scheme

Much of the Taskforce’s recommendations were previously called for by a group headed by Panetta until his appointment as CIA director in 2009. Panetta became defense secretary in July 2011.

Until his CIA appointment in 2009, Panetta co-chaired the Joint Ocean Commission Initiative, which is the partner of Citizens for Global Solutions in a push to ratify U.S. laws and regulations governing the seas.

The oceans initiative bills itself as a bipartisan, collaborative group that aims to “accelerate the pace of change that results in meaningful ocean policy reform.”

Among its main recommendations is that the U.S. should put its oceans up for regulation to the U.N. Convention on the Law of the Sea.

The administration and Congress should establish a national ocean policy. The administration and Congress should support regional, ecosystem-based approaches to the management of ocean, coastal and Great Lakes.
Congress should strengthen and reauthorize the Coastal Zone Management Act.
Congress should strengthen the Clean Water Act.
The Joint Ocean Commission Initiative Leadership Council includes John Podesta, president and CEO of the Soros-funded Center for American Progress, which is reportedly highly influential in advising the White House on policy.

Podesta served as co-chairman of Obama’s presidential transition team.

Panetta’s oceans initiative is a key partner of Citizens for Global Solutions, or CGS, which, according to its literature, envisions a “future in which nations work together to abolish war, protect our rights and freedoms and solve the problems facing humanity that no nation can solve alone.”

CGS states it works to “build the political will in the United States” to achieve this global vision.

The organization currently works on issues that fall into five general areas: U.S. global engagement; global health and environment; peace and security; international law and justice; and international institutions.

CGS is a member organization and supporter of the World Federalist Movement, which openly seeks a one-world government. The World Federalist Movement considers the CGS to be its U.S. branch.

The movement brings together organizations and individuals that support the establishment of a global federal system of strengthened and democratized global institutions with plenary constitutional power accountable to the citizens of the world and a division of international authority among separate global agencies.

The movement’s headquarters are located near the U.N. building in New York City. A second office is near the International Criminal Court in The Hague, Netherlands.

The locations are significant, since the movement heavily promotes the U.N. and is the coordinator of various international projects, such as the Coalition for the International Criminal Court and the Responsibility to Protect military doctrine. That doctrine formed the basis of Obama’s justification last year to launch NATO airstrikes in Libya.

What do you expect? Being from Illinois I will contest that this man has NO experience and is in over his head.Sad for all our kids and grandkids that will have to pay the price for all that voted for him.